The SitePoint Forums have moved.

You can now find them here.
This forum is now closed to new posts, but you can browse existing content.
You can find out more information about the move and how to open a new account (if necessary) here.
If you get stuck you can get support by emailing forums@sitepoint.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Anyone using Blueprint? (CSS framework discussion)

It's a new CSS framework that aims to reduce the pain of creating a cross-browser grid-based layout. It's not done yet (at version 0.3 and still some browser bugs to work out) but it's shaping up to be pretty nice.

So are you using blueprint, or any other CSS framework like Yahoo UI? Do you find it reduces your development/debugging time, or does it just create a new layer of problems?

i especially like some of the planned features, in particular supporting PNG transparency in IE... will make a lot of my mock ups a hell of a lot easier to implement

The javascript for this is already around.

I think it's a good idea - one thing that is missing from my current CSS development is achieving good code reuse - I'm having to repeat the same types of styles / IE fixes etc.. and this simplifies all this development by packaging them in (what will be tried and tested) methods that will always work.

There's a few things that I would have my gripes with, px font sizing for instance - I would have made the grid work to em heights and px widths so that fon't sizing won't break the uniform grid.

It actually reminds me a lot of all4nerds examples using multiple classes to achieve more unique styling.

The thing that I don't like so much about it is the fact that it requires you to litter your html with styling commands. It prevents global changes to the layout of a site. I think a framework like this would help a lot of people start using CSS who don't have the knowledge of all the different rules.

I just downloaded this yesterday as well. It seems pretty promising, and am planning to give it a try, but I'm not all sold on the idea of complicating my CSS with a dozen stylesheets. Like the new guy said a generator or template seems more suited to the job right now.

But then again, it's not a finished product yet. We could probably email a link to this thread to Olav Bjorkoy for feedback.

I'm not touching this with a 50 foot pole. Sorry, but frameworks in general don't mesh well with my minimal markup/coding principles.

I guess, but on the other hand, frameworks in general do mesh with my timesaving principles

TNG, I do think your generator idea is another valid angle to approach this from. It's been done in the past I know, but I haven't seen anything recent so I don't know if those have been updated to deal with current browsers.

I think it is great that someone is trying to put together a bunch of "best practices" but I think it would be difficult for a professional developer to work with someone elses css framework. But the principle of having a framework is very good.http://alistapart.com/articles/frameworksfordesigners

- reset.css
I always start each project with a reset. Erik Meyer's is one. There are other flavors too.

- typography.css
I really like the approach. I haven't used it before but I will include this in my own library from now on!http://alistapart.com/articles/settingtypeontheweb
It was a bit surprising to see the use of pixels instead of ems. I haven't still switched to ems and maybe there is a reason for it.

Don’t fear the pixel. One final note on font sizing: I’m using pixels instead of ems in this example for one reason: it makes everything simpler.

- grid.css
I didn't particularly like this setup, but I use my own. The layout is different but it has familiar terminology like #wrapper, #header, #content, #footer etc.

About using several style sheets, this depends on how much traffic your sites have:

This method works quite well, but there is a valid concern to be raised: it adds to the number of HTTP connections needed to render each page. On large, high-traffic sites, adding five more HTTP connections to every page view may result in angry system administrators.

Although the idea sounds good and it will probably help people developing their own sites as they can use straight forward structures, I don't see that it will help in my line of work when converting designer's PSD's into css layouts exactly.

Of course I may be unique but 99&#37; of my work comes from designers where I'm given a PSD to turn into a CSS layout. I get no input on the design and am handed a finished product that has to be turned into workable css/html.

If I was using a framework then I would have the additional problem of massaging the design into the layout rather than just getting straight on with the coding.

The basic layouts that the frameworks produce can be done in minutes by hand anyway by experienced coders but of course there may be benefits to the less experienced.

There are of course benefits in having a skeleton to work with and I will use the reset css and font reset css as a base but I don't think the designs that I work with would benefit from using a framework such as blueprint.

However, I'm sure it will be useful to others and the examples do seem to be well done and I applaud the effort.

I'd imagine most designers that are doing CSS based layouts will have a library of their own, with their fixes already in place. I know for our sites, we have a basic CMS, and every site uses that, and the CMS takes charge of the various browser workarounds needed etc. We're the same as Paul though, we take a PSD from a designer and turn it in to a CSS based layout.

Is no-one else even a little annoyed that he's getting all this publicity for just putting together other people's work???

I mean:
- Using typgraphy.css, grid.css etc. to organise your CSS is the exact approach Andy Clarke recommends in "Transcending CSS."
- The reset stylesheet is literally copied and pasted from ericmeyer.com
- The grid he uses (Right down to the 18px sizes!) has been lifted right out of an A List Apart article.
- Things like png transparency in IE have been around for years. He's just picking his favourite method to copy and paste...

I completely agree with most of the input here already. Whilst in principle it's a good idea and I certainly think it will help beginners or those less experienced with CSS layouts, for the developer who has been used to creating CSS, it will be a little limited and more time will be made customising the framework than it would for someone experienced to code from scratch.

I'm sure it will have it's uses as I have my own starter CSS file which I'll use for all projects which will generally consist of .error, .warning, .information, .success, .hidden etc which I use across different projects but as far as layouts go I don't think it's neccesary to start with a framework as each project usually differs.

Is no-one else even a little annoyed that he's getting all this publicity for just putting together other people's work???

I mean:
- Using typgraphy.css, grid.css etc. to organise your CSS is the exact approach Andy Clarke recommends in "Transcending CSS."
- The reset stylesheet is literally copied and pasted from ericmeyer.com
- The grid he uses (Right down to the 18px sizes!) has been lifted right out of an A List Apart article.
- Things like png transparency in IE have been around for years. He's just picking his favourite method to copy and paste...

Not really, I'm sure a lot of people wish they'd thought of it first

If he was passing it off as his own work then I think those original authors would have every right to feel aggrieved but he's openly admitting that the work is a collaboration of other people's so I don't personally see anything wrong with that if it's going to help others.

Is no-one else even a little annoyed that he's getting all this publicity for just putting together other people's work???

Like it was said before, he's giving all the credit he possibly can to the original creators. He's just bringing them all together in an easy to use way to contribute to the community. Something I'd wished (and other developers have talked about) for a long time. What's annoying is when people make such bland accusations.

I'm not touching this with a 50 foot pole. Sorry, but frameworks in general don't mesh well with my minimal markup/coding principles.

Ive had a quick browse at them and i have to agree with Dan, i wouldn't touch them. They might save time, but ive been working with CSS for that long that i know most of the tricks and work-arounds and personally i like to do the hardwork, just so that i know im competent at what i do. I'd rather much value my customers then my time, they are the ones paying, they do deserve the best.

Ive got my own templates i developed over the year or so, and they never fail me and the mark-up is alot less bulky then googles and YUI.

Looking at the YUI and Google frameworks, they look way OTT. To much mark-up for no reason at all, great for the n00bs, but for the experienced, most wouldn't bother.

Seems all silly to me, just a way for Yahoo and Google to get the punters in.

Says the guy who wrote his own servlet framework (don't kid yourself you wrote a framework that pulls info from text files)

Originally Posted by cascadingstylez

Ive had a quick browse at them and i have to agree with Dan, i wouldn't touch them. They might save time, but ive been working with CSS for that long that i know most of the tricks and work-arounds and personally i like to do the hardwork, just so that i know im competent at what i do. I'd rather much value my customers then my time, they are the ones paying, they do deserve the best.

I value my customers too, that's why I save time which in turn saves them money. Time and customer love aren't mutually exclusive.

Originally Posted by cascadingstylez

Ive got my own templates i developed over the year or so, and they never fail me and the mark-up is alot less bulky then googles and YUI.

So you hate frameworks and like doing the hard work but...you made your own framework. What?

Originally Posted by cascadingstylez

Seems all silly to me, just a way for Yahoo and Google to get the punters in.

Blueprint is not a google project. It's just hosted on Google Code, which is a lot like Sourceforge. People can submit their projects and Google only hosts it.

Like it was said before, he's giving all the credit he possibly can to the original creators. He's just bringing them all together in an easy to use way to contribute to the community. Something I'd wished (and other developers have talked about) for a long time. What's annoying is when people make such bland accusations.

Why did you wish for this for a long time?? The tools were already there. Why didn't you do it yourself?

I'll say it again; I just don't think it's all that fair that this guy is getting so much more buzz than the actual authors, just because he put them all together. What's so wrong about that?